DOCSLIB.ORG

Biological Control

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biological Control KLAMATH WEED (= ST. JOHN'S WORT) Hypericum perforatum L. – Hypericaceae Dr. E. Fred Legner, University of California Retrieved from: http://faculty.ucr.edu/~legneref/biotact/ch-66.htm This weed is of European origin, and was first reported as a pest in northern California near the Klamath River. It increased and spread rapidly and by 1944 had occupied over two million acres of rangeland in thirty counties of California. Not only were food forage plants greatly reduced but cattle and sheep lost weight when eating the weed because of its toxic effect, sensitizing them to sunlight. This resulted in such a great decrease in land values that it became almost impossible for ranchers to borrow money for development (DeBach 1974). Chemical herbicides were available but not practical because of cost and the inaccessibility of most of the infested land. Dr. Harry S. Smith, head of biological control work in California, proposed the importation of insects that attacked the weed as early as 1922, but the thought of deliberately introducing a plant feeding insect was not acceptable at that time. At the same time, in Australia phytophagous insects to control Klamath weed were being introduced from England and Europe beginning in 1929, and Dr. Smith in California followed the progress there with great interest through correspondence with Dr. A. J. Nicholson, Chief Entomologist for the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO). Authorization was finally obtained in 1944 to import three species of beetles that showed promise against the weed in Australia. It was not possible then to consider importations from Europe because of World War II, but rather simple to bring material from Australia through the cooperation of the United States Army Transport Command. The CSIRO offered to collect and prepare the material for shipment. Importations began in October 1944 but problems were soon encountered in changing the timing of the life cycle so the beetles would be in phase with seasons in the Northern Hemisphere. Two species of Chrysolina that were in aestivation responded rapidly in California to fine mist sprays of water to become active and lay eggs within three weeks. The third species, Agrilus sp., was lost. After starvation tests in quarantine on a variety of economic plants the beetles were released in the field. Chrysolina hyperici (Förster) was liberated in the spring of 1945 and Chrysolina quadrigemina (Suffrian) in February 1946. Both were readily established but it soon became evident that C. quadrigemina was becoming dominant. Distribution throughout the entire infested areas was rapidly made from the original colonies. From one colony of 5,000 beetles released in 1945-6, more than 3 million beetles were collected for redistribution in California in 1950. There were also sent to Oregon, Washington, Idaho and Montana where they became established. The Klamath weed was reduced to the status of an uncommon roadside weed in California after 10 years, its abundance having been reduced >99%. Land values immediately increased 3-4X, and weight losses in cattle and sheep ceased. It was estimated that at least $20,960,000.00 in savings accrued to the agriculture industry in California for the period 1953-9 or about $3,500,000.00 per year (DeBach 1974), and these savings continue to accrue each year without even taking inflation into account (Holloway 1964). This effort was one of the few transfer projects during World War II. For example, the leaf beetle, Chrysolinahyperici (Förster) was transferred from Australia to New Zealand in 1943 for the biological control of St. Johnswort. In 1944 the introduction of several insect species from Australia was made to California for specificity testing and release during 1945-46 for the biological control of St. Johnswort, which became known as Klamath weed. J. K. Holloway of the USDA and H. S. Smith of UC, Riverside organized the work. Successful biological control of Klamath weed, primarily caused by the defoliating leaf beetle, Chrysolina quadrigemina (Suffrian), rivaled the Australian success with prickly pear cacti. This success primarily was responsible for fostering the establishment and expansion of biological noxious plant control in North America (Huffaker 1957). The first intentional introduction of an insect for plant control was made in Canada in 1950 with the importation of Chrysolina quadrigemina and C. hyperici from California to control St. Johnswort (Smith 1951). Within a decade after the liberation of C. hyperici and C. quadrigemina, the Klamath weed had been reduced in status from an extremely important rangeland scourge to that of an occasional roadside plant, and now occurs at less than 1% of its former density and has been removed from the list of noxious plants in California (Holloway & Huffaker 1949, 1951, Goeden & Andrés 1999). Its present occurrence primarily along roadsides is linked to disturbance there of the phytophagous biological control agents (E. F. Legner, unpub. data). For greater detail on biological control efforts, and biologies of host plant and natural enemies, please see the following (Froggatt 1919, Tryon 1919, Tillyard 1927a,b,c, 1930a,b, 1934; Currie & Garthside 1932, Currie & Fyfe 1938, Currie 1940, Moore & Cashmore 1942, Wilson 1943, 1953, 1960, 1963; Wilson & Campbell 1943, Miller 1944, 1945, 1946, 1947, 1948, 1951; Cashmore & Campbell 1946, Holloway 1948, 1964; Huffaker 1948, 1967; Abrams 1951, Smith 1951, 1955, 1958; Clark & Clark 1952, Clark 1953, Holloway & Huffaker 1952, 1953; Huffaker & Kennett 1953, Holloway 1957, 1964; Parsons 1957, Marco 1959, Munz & Keck 1959, Villaneuva & Faure 1959, 1964, Douglas & Schmidl 1960, Harris 1962, 1967; Johansson 1962a,b; McLeod 1962, Nelson 1962, Hoy 1963, Kingsbury 1964, Davis & Krauss 1966, 1967; Henderson & Anderson 1966, Ritcher 1966, Given 1967, Davis 1968, Goeden 1970). REFERENCES: Abrams, L. 1951. Illustrated Flora of the Pacific States. III. Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford, Calif. 866 p. Bellows, T. S. & T. W. Fisher (eds.). 1999. Handbook of Biological Control: Principles and Applications. Academic Press, San Diego, New York. 1046 p. Cashmore, A. B. & T. G. Campbell. 1946. The weed problem in Australia: A review. Austral. Council Sci. & Indus. Res. J. 19: 16-31. Clark, L. R. 1953. The ecology of Chrysomela gemellata Rossi and C. hyperici Forst., and their effect on St. John's wort in the Bright District, Victoria. Aust. J. Zool. 1: 1-69. Clark, L. R. & N. Clark. 1952. A study of the effect of Chrysolina hyperici Forst. on St. John's wort in the Nannus Valley, N.S.W. Austral. J. Agric. Res. 3: 29-59. Clark, N. 1953. The biology of Hypericum perforatum L. var. angustifolium DC. (St. John's wort) in the Ovens Valley, Victoria, with particular reference to entomological control. Aust. J. Bot. 1: 95- 120. Currie, G. A. 1940. Some Australian weed problems. In: Commonwealth Bur. Pasture and Field Crops, Herb. Publ. Ser. Bull. 27: 113-30. Currie, G. A. & R. V. Fyfe. 1938. The fate of certain European insects introduced into Australia for the control of weeds. Austral. Council Sci. & Indus. Res. J. 11: 289-301. Currie, G. A. & S. Garthside. 1932. The possibility of the entomological control of St. John's wort in Australia--progress report. Austral. Council Sci. & Indus. Res. Pam. 29: 1-25. Davis, C. J. 1968. Report of the Entomology Branch. Hawaii Dept. Agric. Rept., 10 p. (Mimeo). Davis, C. J. & N. L. H. Krauss. 1966. Recent introductions for biological control. Hawaii. Ent. Soc. Proc. 19: 201-07. Davis, C. J. & N. L. H. Krauss. 1967. Recent introductions for biological control in Hawaii--XI. Hawaii. Ent. Soc. Proc. 19: 375-80. DeBach, P. 1974. Biological Control by Natural Enemies. Cambridge University Press, London & New York. 323 p. Douglas, G. W. & L. Schmidl. 1960. A review of biological control of noxious weeds in Victoria. 2nd Austral. Weed Conf. 1 Proc., Paper 1. 6 p. Froggatt, W. W. 1919. Insects and St. John's wort. New South Wales Agric. Gaz., Misc. Publ. 2192: 470- 72. Given, B. B. 1967. Biological control of weeds and insect pests in New Zealand. Mushi 39 (Sup.): 17-22. Goeden, R. D. 1977. Chapter 4: Biological control of weeds, p. 43-47. In: B. Truelove (ed.), Research Methods in Weed Science. S. Weed Sci. Soc., Auburn Printing, Auburn, Georgia. Goeden, R. D. 1978. Hypericaceae. In: C. P. Clausen (ed.), Introduced Parasites and Predators of Arthropod Pests and Weeds: A World Review. U. S. Dept. Agric., Agric. Handbk. No. 480. 545 p. Goeden, R. D. & L. A. Andrés. 1999. Biological control of weeds in terrestrial and aquatic environments. In: Bellows, T. S. & T. W. Fisher (eds.). Handbook of Biological Control: Principles and Applications. Academic Press, San Diego, New York. 1046 p. Harris, P. 1962. Effect of temperature on fecundity and survival of Chrysolina quadrigemina (Suffr.) and C. hyperici(Forst.) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Canad. Ent. 94: 774-80. Harris, P. 1967. Suitability of Anaitis plagiata (Geometridae) for biocontrol of Hypericum perforatum in dry grassland of British Columbia. Canad. Ent. 99: 1304-10. Henderson, M. & J. G. Anderson. 1966. Common weeds in South Africa. So. Africa Dept. Agric. Tech. Serv., Bot. Res. Inst. Bot. Survey, Mem. 37: 1-440. Holloway, J. K. 1948. Biological control of Klamath weed--progress report. J. Econ. Ent. 41: 56-7. Holloway, J. K. 1957. Weed control by an insect. Scien. Amer. 54: 57-62. Holloway, J. K. 1964. Projects in biological control of weeds. In: P. DeBach (ed.), Biological Control of Insect Pests and Weeds, p. 650-70. Reinhold Publ. Corp., New York. 844 p. Holloway, J. K. & C. B. Huffaker. 1949. Klamath weed beetles. Calif. Agric. 3: 3-10. Holloway, J. K. & C. B. Huffaker. 1951. The role of Chrysolina gemellata in the biological control of Klamath weed. J. Econ. Ent. 44: 244-47. Holloway, J. K. & C. B. Huffaker. 1952. Insects to control a weed.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Biological Control of St John's Wort Using Chrysolina Leaf Beetles (DSE
    June 1999 Biological control of St John's wort LC0152 with the chrysolina leaf beetles ISSN 1329-833X Keith Turnbull Research Institute (Frankston) Common and scientific names Pupae - in globular cells in the soil at up to 5 cm depth. St John’s wort leaf beetles Life cycle Chrysolina hyperici (Förster) Females lay eggs on the undersides of leaves or leaf buds Chrysolina quadrigemina (Suffrian) in autumn. C. quadrigemina larvae emerge after about 3 Background weeks and overwinter as larvae. C. hyperici overwinters in the egg stage. Larvae consume the young leaves and buds St John’s wort, Hypericum perforatum, was introduced in of procumbent autumn and winter growth. Larger larvae the Ovens Valley of Victoria as a medicinal plant in the leave the plant during the day and return to feed at night. 1860s. It spread rapidly and was well established by the When mature, they pupate in the soil at a depth of a few early 1900s. It is a serious weed of improved pastures, centimetres. The pupal stage lasts 2 to 3 weeks and adults roadsides and neglected areas in north east Victoria and is emerge in the spring. Adult beetles defoliate the erect an increasing problem in dry forests and woodlands. In spring plants and enter a resting stage (aestivation or natural areas it is a serious environmental weed which can diapause) under the bark of trees during summer. out-compete other ground storey plants. St John’s wort is a Regionally Prohibited Weed in the Corangamite and Port Phillip West Catchment and Land Protection Regions, and a Regionally Controlled Weed in all other areas of Victoria except Mallee CaLP Region.
    [Show full text]
  • Data on Cerambycidae and Chrysomelidae (Coleoptera: Chrysomeloidea) from Bucureªti and Surroundings
    Travaux du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle © Novembre Vol. LI pp. 387–416 «Grigore Antipa» 2008 DATA ON CERAMBYCIDAE AND CHRYSOMELIDAE (COLEOPTERA: CHRYSOMELOIDEA) FROM BUCUREªTI AND SURROUNDINGS RODICA SERAFIM, SANDA MAICAN Abstract. The paper presents a synthesis of the data refering to the presence of cerambycids and chrysomelids species of Bucharest and its surroundings, basing on bibliographical sources and the study of the collection material. A number of 365 species of superfamily Chrysomeloidea (140 cerambycids and 225 chrysomelids species), belonging to 125 genera of 16 subfamilies are listed. The species Chlorophorus herbstii, Clytus lama, Cortodera femorata, Phytoecia caerulea, Lema cyanella, Chrysolina varians, Phaedon cochleariae, Phyllotreta undulata, Cassida prasina and Cassida vittata are reported for the first time in this area. Résumé. Ce travail présente une synthèse des données concernant la présence des espèces de cerambycides et de chrysomelides de Bucarest et de ses environs, la base en étant les sources bibliographiques ainsi que l’étude du matériel existant dans les collections du musée. La liste comprend 365 espèces appartenant à la supra-famille des Chrysomeloidea (140 espèces de cerambycides et 225 espèces de chrysomelides), encadrées en 125 genres et 16 sous-familles. Les espèces Chlorophorus herbstii, Clytus lama, Cortodera femorata, Phytoecia caerulea, Lema cyanella, Chrysolina varians, Phaedon cochleariae, Phyllotreta undulata, Cassida prasina et Cassida vittata sont mentionnées pour la première fois dans cette zone Key words: Coleoptera, Chrysomeloidea, Cerambycidae, Chrysomelidae, Bucureºti (Bucharest) and surrounding areas. INTRODUCTION Data on the distribution of the cerambycids and chrysomelids species in Bucureºti (Bucharest) and the surrounding areas were published beginning with the end of the 19th century by: Jaquet (1898 a, b, 1899 a, b, 1900 a, b, 1901, 1902), Montandon (1880, 1906, 1908), Hurmuzachi (1901, 1902, 1904), Fleck (1905 a, b), Manolache (1930), Panin (1941, 1944), Eliescu et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Invasive Plant Management on Anticipated Conservation Benefits: a Scientific Assessment
    CHAPTER 7 Invasive Plant Management on Anticipated Conservation Benefits: A Scientific Assessment Roger L. Sheley,1 Jeremy J. James,2 Mathew J. Rinella,3 Dana Blumenthal,4and Joseph M. DiTomaso5 Authors are 1Ecologist and 2Plant Physiologist, US Department of Agriculture– Agricultural Research Service, Burns, OR 97720, USA; 3Rangeland Management Specialist, US Department of Agriculture–Agricultural Research Service, Miles City, MT 59301, USA; 4Ecologist, US Department of Agriculture–Agricultural Research Service, Fort Collins, CO 80526, USA; and 5Weed Specialist, University of California-Davis, Davis, CA 95616, USA. Correspondence: Roger L. Sheley 67826-A Hwy 205, Burns, OR 97720; [email protected]. Reference to any commercial product or service is made with the understanding that no discrimination is intended and no endorsement by USDA is implied 291 A major weakness in invasive plant “management is our lack of knowledge about the efficacy of various prevention strategies. ” 292 Conservation Benefits of Rangeland Practices Invasive Plant Management on Anticipated Conservation Benefits: A Scientific Assessment 7 Roger L. Sheley, Jeremy J. James, Mathew J. Rinella, Dana Blumenthal, and Joseph M. DiTomaso IntroduCtIon at the same time posing minimal risk to people, property, resources, and the environment. Invasive plant species have many negative impacts on rangelands throughout the world. In recent years, invasive plant management Invasive plants can displace desirable species, has evolved to more frequently incorporate an alter ecological processes, reduce wildlife IPM philosophy, as opposed to focusing on a habitat, degrade riparian systems, and decrease single control option with little consideration productivity (DiTomaso 2000; Masters and of the ecosystem or the side effects of particular Sheley 2001).
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan: US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area, El Paso County, CO
    Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area August 2015 CNHP’s mission is to preserve the natural diversity of life by contributing the essential scientific foundation that leads to lasting conservation of Colorado's biological wealth. Colorado Natural Heritage Program Warner College of Natural Resources Colorado State University 1475 Campus Delivery Fort Collins, CO 80523 (970) 491-7331 Report Prepared for: United States Air Force Academy Department of Natural Resources Recommended Citation: Smith, P., S. S. Panjabi, and J. Handwerk. 2015. Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan: US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area, El Paso County, CO. Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. Front Cover: Documenting weeds at the US Air Force Academy. Photos courtesy of the Colorado Natural Heritage Program © Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area El Paso County, CO Pam Smith, Susan Spackman Panjabi, and Jill Handwerk Colorado Natural Heritage Program Warner College of Natural Resources Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 August 2015 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Various federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, orders, and policies require land managers to control noxious weeds. The purpose of this plan is to provide a guide to manage, in the most efficient and effective manner, the noxious weeds on the US Air Force Academy (Academy) and Farish Recreation Area (Farish) over the next 10 years (through 2025), in accordance with their respective integrated natural resources management plans. This plan pertains to the “natural” portions of the Academy and excludes highly developed areas, such as around buildings, recreation fields, and lawns.
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter Dedicated to Information About the Chrysomelidae Report No
    CHRYSOMELA newsletter Dedicated to information about the Chrysomelidae Report No. 55 March 2017 ICE LEAF BEETLE SYMPOSIUM, 2016 Fig. 1. Chrysomelid colleagues at meeting, from left: Vivian Flinte, Adelita Linzmeier, Caroline Chaboo, Margarete Macedo and Vivian Sandoval (Story, page 15). LIFE WITH PACHYBRACHIS Inside This Issue 2- Editor’s page, submissions 3- 2nd European Leaf Beetle Meeting 4- Intromittant organ &spermathecal duct in Cassidinae 6- In Memoriam: Krishna K. Verma 7- Horst Kippenberg 14- Central European Leaf Beetle Meeting 11- Life with Pachybrachis 13- Ophraella communa in Italy 16- 2014 European leaf beetle symposium 17- 2016 ICE Leaf beetle symposium 18- In Memoriam: Manfred Doberl 19- In Memoriam: Walter Steinhausen 22- 2015 European leaf beetle symposium 23- E-mail list Fig. 1. Edward Riley (left), Robert Barney (center) and Shawn Clark 25- Questionnaire (right) in Dunbar Barrens, Wisconsin, USA. Story, page 11 International Date Book The Editor’s Page Chrysomela is back! 2017 Entomological Society of America Dear Chrysomelid Colleagues: November annual meeting, Denver, Colorado The absence pf Chrysomela was the usual combina- tion of too few submissions, then a flood of articles in fall 2018 European Congress of Entomology, 2016, but my mix of personal and professional changes at July, Naples, Italy the moment distracted my attention. As usual, please consider writing about your research, updates, and other 2020 International Congress of Entomology topics in leaf beetles. I encourage new members to July, Helsinki, Finland participate in the newsletter. A major development in our community was the initiation of a Facebook group, Chrysomelidae Forum, by Michael Geiser. It is popular and connections grow daily.
    [Show full text]
  • Regulation of Classical Biological Control of Invasive Plants in North America
    Evaluating and Regulating Biological Control Agents: A North American Perspective P.G. Mason Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada North American Plant Protection Organization, Ottawa, Ontario EPPO / COST - SMARTER / IOBC / IBMA / CABI WORKSHOP ON EVALUATION AND REGULATION OF BIOLOGICAL CONTROL AGENTS 23-24 November 2015 North American history … Entomophagous biological control agents • United States – first release in 1888: Cryptochetum iceryae against Icerya purchasi (cottony cushion scale) in citrus; Rodalia cardinalis was released in 1889 • Canada – first release in 1885: Trichogramma minutum against Nematus ribesii (imported currantworm); 1910 Mesoleius tenthredinis against Pristiphora erichsonii (larch sawfly) • Mexico – first release in 1922: Lixiphaga diatraeae against Diatraea saccharalis (sugarcane borer) Phytophagous biological control agents • United States – first release in 1945: Chrysolina hyperici against Hypericum perforatum (Klamath weed, St. John’s wort) • Canada – first release in 1951 : C. hyperici against H. perforatum • Mexico – first release in 1977: Neochetina eichhorniae against Eichhornia crassipes (water hyacinth) … North American history … United States • 1957 - Subcommittee on Biological Control of Weeds established [U.S. Department of the Interior’s (USDI) Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Land Management, and Fish and Wildlife Service; and from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Forest Service and Agricultural Research Service]. • 1971 - name changed to Working Group on Biological Control of Weeds. Canadian and Mexican comments were invited because the Working Group knew that an introduced organism recognizes no political boundaries and its introduction needed to be considered on a continental basis. [+ Environmental Protection Agency, Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (now the National Institute of Food and Agriculture), and the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Japanese Beetle Look-Alikes Sheet
    S. Katovich, Bugwood.org (Popillia japonica) Japanese Beetle NOVEMBER 2020 Look-Alikes INVASIVE SPECIES About Japanese Beetle Actual size: 10 mm The Japanese Beetle (Popillia japonica) is an invasive pest destructive to ornamental plants, turfgrasses and many of BC’s horticulture and agriculture industries. The three main identifying characteristics are: » metallic green head » metallic copper-brown wing coverings » white tufts of hair around the abdomen If a Japanese Beetle is found, please call 604-292-5742 OR email: [email protected]. J. Berger, Bugwood.org Look-Alikes (Photos do not represent actual size; scale bars represent actual size of typical body length) These insects are commonly mistaken as Japanese Beetle. INVASIVE SPECIES NATIVE SPECIES NATIVE SPECIES NATIVE SPECIES NATIVE SPECIES Actual size: 10 mm Actual size: 30 mm Actual size: 20 mm Actual size: 20 mm Actual size: 5 mm M. Dollenkamp, R. Szczygiel, Flickr.com E. Nelson, Bugwood.org D. Ditchburn, BugGuide.net Frog Pond Photography C. Moorehead, Bugwood.org European Brown Chafer Ten-Lined June Beetle Green Rose Chafer Golden Buprestid St. John’s wort beetle (Amphimallon majale) (Polyphylla occidentalis) (Dichelonyx backii) (Buprestis aurulenta) (Chrysolina hyperici) INVASIVE SPECIES INVASIVE SPECIES NATIVE SPECIES NATIVE SPECIES NATIVE SPECIES Actual size: 5 mm Actual size: 15 mm Actual size: 15 mm Actual size: 10 mm Actual size: 10 mm D. Henton-Jones, Flickr.com S. Ellis, Bugwood.org Y. Uriel Y. Uriel D. Cappaert, Bugwood.org Viburnum Leaf Beetle Brown Marmorated Stink Green Stink Bug Banasa Stink Bug Green Bottle Fly (Pyrrhalta viburni) Bug (Halyomorpha halys) (Chlorochroa spp.) (Banasa spp.) (Lucilia sericata) BCINVASIVES.CA/JB / [email protected] / 1-888-933-3722 Feeding Damage Life Cycle Your help and vigilance is needed to protect our urban, park, and natural The adult flight period occurs areas from damage.
    [Show full text]
  • Leaf Beetle Larvae
    Scottish Beetles BeesIntroduction and wasps to Leaf Beetles (Chrysomelidae) There are approximately 281 species of leaf beetles in the UK. This guide is an introduction to 17 species found in this family. It is intended to be used in combination with the beetle anatomy guide and survey and recording guides. Colourful and often metallic beetles, where the 3rd tarsi is heart shaped. Species in this family are 1-18mm and are oval or elongated oval shaped. The plants each beetle is found on are usually key to their identification. Many of the species of beetles found in Scotland need careful examination with a microscope to identify them. This guide is designed to introduce some of the leaf beetles you may find and give some key Dead nettle leaf beetle (Chrysolina fastuosa ) 5-6mm This leaf beetle is found on hemp nettle and dead nettle plants. It is beautifully coloured with its typically metallic green base and blue, red and gold banding. The elytra are densely punctured. Where to look - Found mainly in wetlands from March to December from the Central Belt to Aberdeenshire and Inverness © Ben Hamers © Ben Rosemary leaf beetle (Chrysolina americana ) 6-8mm The Rosemary beetle is a recent invasive non- native species introduced to the UK through the international plant trade. This beetle is metallic red/burgundy with green striping. There are lines of punctures typically following the green stripes. Where to look - Found in nurseries, gardens and parks. Feeds on lavender and rosemary in particular. There have been records in Edinburgh but this beetle is spreading.
    [Show full text]
  • Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae) in Cyprus - a Study Initiated from Social Media
    Biodiversity Data Journal 9: e61349 doi: 10.3897/BDJ.9.e61349 Research Article First records of the pest leaf beetle Chrysolina (Chrysolinopsis) americana (Linnaeus, 1758) (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae) in Cyprus - a study initiated from social media Michael Hadjiconstantis‡, Christos Zoumides§ ‡ Association for the Protection of Natural Heritage and Biodiversity of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus § Energy, Environment & Water Research Center, The Cyprus Institute, Nicosia, Cyprus Corresponding author: Michael Hadjiconstantis ([email protected]) Academic editor: Marianna Simões Received: 24 Nov 2020 | Accepted: 22 Jan 2021 | Published: 12 Feb 2021 Citation: Hadjiconstantis M, Zoumides C (2021) First records of the pest leaf beetle Chrysolina (Chrysolinopsis) americana (Linnaeus, 1758) (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae) in Cyprus - a study initiated from social media. Biodiversity Data Journal 9: e61349. https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.9.e61349 Abstract The leaf beetle Chrysolina (Chrysolinopsis) americana (Linnaeus, 1758), commonly known as the Rosemary beetle, is native to some parts of the Mediterranean region. In the last few decades, it has expanded its distribution to new regions in the North and Eastern Mediterranean basin. Chrysolina americana feeds on plants of the Lamiaceae family, such as Rosmarinus officinalis, Lavandula spp., Salvia spp., Thymus spp. and others. Chrysolina americana is considered a pest, as many of its host plants are of commercial importance and are often used as ornamentals in house gardens and green public spaces. In this work, we report the first occurrence of C. americana in Cyprus and we present its establishment, expansion and distribution across the Island, through recordings for the period 2015 – 2020. The study was initiated from a post on a Facebook group, where the species was noticed in Cyprus for the first time, indicating that social media and citizen science can be particularly helpful in biodiversity research.
    [Show full text]
  • An Inventory of Nepal's Insects
    An Inventory of Nepal's Insects Volume III (Hemiptera, Hymenoptera, Coleoptera & Diptera) V. K. Thapa An Inventory of Nepal's Insects Volume III (Hemiptera, Hymenoptera, Coleoptera& Diptera) V.K. Thapa IUCN-The World Conservation Union 2000 Published by: IUCN Nepal Copyright: 2000. IUCN Nepal The role of the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) in supporting the IUCN Nepal is gratefully acknowledged. The material in this publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for education or non-profit uses, without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. IUCN Nepal would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication, which uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or other commercial purposes without prior written permission of IUCN Nepal. Citation: Thapa, V.K., 2000. An Inventory of Nepal's Insects, Vol. III. IUCN Nepal, Kathmandu, xi + 475 pp. Data Processing and Design: Rabin Shrestha and Kanhaiya L. Shrestha Cover Art: From left to right: Shield bug ( Poecilocoris nepalensis), June beetle (Popilla nasuta) and Ichneumon wasp (Ichneumonidae) respectively. Source: Ms. Astrid Bjornsen, Insects of Nepal's Mid Hills poster, IUCN Nepal. ISBN: 92-9144-049 -3 Available from: IUCN Nepal P.O. Box 3923 Kathmandu, Nepal IUCN Nepal Biodiversity Publication Series aims to publish scientific information on biodiversity wealth of Nepal. Publication will appear as and when information are available and ready to publish. List of publications thus far: Series 1: An Inventory of Nepal's Insects, Vol. I. Series 2: The Rattans of Nepal.
    [Show full text]
  • Response of Two Chrysolina Species to Different Hypericum Hosts
    Seventeenth Australasian Weeds Conference Response of two Chrysolina species to different Hypericum hosts Ronny Groenteman', Simon V. Fowler' and Jon J. Sullivan2 ' Landcare Research, Gerald Street, PO Box 40, Lincoln, New Zealand 2Bio-Protection Research Centre, PO Box 84, Lincoln University, Lincoln, New Zealand Corresponding author: [email protected] SummaryChrysolina hyperici and C. quadrigemina introduced in 1963 but, for many years was thought (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) were introduced to to have failed to establish (reviewed by Hancox et al. New Zealand for biological control of St John's wort 1986). Chrysolina quadrigemina was rediscovered in (SJW), Hypericum perforatum, following successful the late 1980s (Fraser and Emberson 1987). It is now biological control in Australia. In other parts of the abundant in mixed populations with C. hyperici (R. invaded range of SJW worldwide C. quadrigemina is Groenteman personal observations). generally accepted as the more significant contributor St John's wort beetles are not strictly restricted to to SJW successful biocontrol. Their ability to feed and H. perforatum, and are known to be able to develop on develop on indigenous Hypericum species was not other Hypericum species (some examples are reviewed tested. Chrysolina hyperici established well while C. by Harris 1988). New Zealand hosts 10 naturalised quadrigemina was initially thought to have failed to es- (Healy 1972) and four indigenous (Heenan 2008) tablish in New Zealand, although it is now widespread. Hypericum species. Little is known about the suit- Thus, identifying differences between Chrysolina spe- ability and impacts of either Chrysolina species on cies in host preference and performance would have these Hypericum species.
    [Show full text]
  • An Alternative Perspective for the Theory of Biological Control
    insects Perspective An Alternative Perspective for the Theory of Biological Control Nicholas J. Mills Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-3114, USA; [email protected]; Tel.: +1-510-642-1711 Received: 12 September 2018; Accepted: 29 September 2018; Published: 2 October 2018 Abstract: Importation biological control represents the planned introduction of a specialist natural enemy from the region of origin of an invasive pest or weed. For this study, the author considered why attempts to develop a predictive theory for biological control have been misguided and what future directions might be more promising and effective. Despite considerable interest in the theory of consumer–resource population dynamics, such theory has contributed little to improvements in the success of biological control due to a focus on persistence and equilibrium dynamics rather than establishment and impact. A broader consideration of invasion biology in addition to population ecology offers new opportunities for a more inclusive theory of biological control that incorporates the demographic and genetic processes that more specifically address the establishment and impact of introduced natural enemies. The importance of propagule size and genetic variance for successful establishment, and of contributions to host population growth, relative population growth rates, interaction strength, and coevolution for suppression of host abundance are discussed as promising future directions for a theory of biological control. Keywords: pest; weed; importation; establishment; impact; demography; genetics 1. Introduction Biological control is an ecosystem service in which a pest or weed is effectively controlled through interactions with its natural enemies, and in many cases the natural enemies are insects [1].
    [Show full text]